Memeorandum

July 28, 2011

Fired Up And Ready To Go

Political maven Keith Hennesey backs the Boehner bill as both viable and not so bad on the merits:

First I’ll flag what I like about the substance of the bill.

As initially drafted it would cut spending by $850 B over the next decade. That’s not chump change. I expect this number will soon go up to $900 B – $1 T. Update: New version is $917 B in spending cuts over 10.

It has statutory discretionary spending caps and a sequester to enforce them.

It does not raise taxes.

It raises the debt limit, as we must do.

It also tees up House and Senate floor votes on the Balanced Budget Amendment, but that is not my priority. A BBA would take years to enact, and we cannot wait that long to fix the underlying math problem.

I support the Boehner bill for the following reasons:

It cuts spending and it doesn’t raise taxes. That is an improvement over current law.

There is nothing in the bill that I dislike. That’s a rarity.

It is better than the Reid bill, which is the next most likely alternative to become law if the Boehner bill fails.

It tees up this battle again in 4-6 months, providing another opportunity and keeping the pressure on to cut spending.

It creates a process that keeps our underlying fiscal policy problems front-and-center for the foreseeable future rather than punting them into 2013.

I can see no viable alternative strategy to enact a stronger bill.

...

If I could strengthen the Boehner bill further, my top priority would be to increase the depth and breadth of spending cuts, and especially get savings from the Big 3 entitlement programs. In the process reform world my priority would be the “Cap” portion of “Cut, Cap, and Balance.” I strongly support the 20% of GDP spending cap in that bill.

But I don’t have a viable strategy to enact such an improved bill, and, as best I can tell, neither do those conservatives who oppose the Boehner bill. I think it is a mistake to oppose a bill that improves on current law if you don’t have both a better policy and a strategy to achieve it.

First let’s establish that “Fight harder” and “Communicate your message better” are cheers rather than strategies. Cut, Cap, and Balance is a good policy, it is not a strategy. If you disagree with what Speaker Boehner is doing, present another strategic option, which is more than just a policy or a cheer.

ALL OVER BUT THE BOWS AND PIE-ING: Nate Silver and Major Garrett explain that the Reid and Boehner bills are not that far apart, suggesting a final deal is highly likely.

NBC's First Read highlights the Democrats collapse strategic withdrawal bold advance in a new direction:

*** In retreat: In this debt debate, who’s up one day can quickly go down the next -- and vice versa. That’s why, after we wrote yesterday that House Speaker John Boehner was boxed in, he now appears likely to get his legislation through the House today (he turned things around the old fashioned way; he willed it). But when you take a step back from the hour-by-hour movements in this debate, it’s obvious how much ground the White House and Democrats have conceded. First, they retreated on their push for a clean debt-ceiling raise. Then they retreated on the size of the spending cuts (now both sides say the cuts must equal or exceed the eventual debt-limit hike). Then they backed away from insisting that tax revenues be included in the final package (both the Boehner and Reid plans exclude them). And now it seems that their final line in the sand is insisting that the debt ceiling must -- in one step -- be raised beyond 2012, versus Boehner’s two-step approach, which would guarantee another debt showdown early next year.

*** Another line in the sand, and another retreat? Yesterday afternoon, the entire Dem Senate caucus -- the 51 Democrats and two Dem-leaning independents -- signed a letter to Boehner saying they’d oppose his legislation if it gets to their chamber. “A short-term extension like the one in your bill would put America at risk, along with every family and business in it,” the letter states. “Your approach would force us once again to face the threat of default in five or six short months. Every day, another expert warns us that your short-term approach could be nearly as disastrous as a default and would lead to a downgrade in our credit rating.” But will Democrats once again blink? Bottom line: It looks like they’ve gotten their clocks cleaned in these negotiations, and Republicans are once again counting on Democrats to retreat. The one thing that could bail out Democrats: that the GOP doesn't know when to declare victory and walk away from the blackjack table.

If we get to Friday and the Senate has yet to pass its own bill, one more concession becomes inevitable.

And the NY Times wonders whether this would be happening if Obama were President:

President on Sidelines in Critical Battle Over Debt Ceiling

Obama and his advisers are studying the polls and conjuring a strategy to present the Boehner bill as not only a big Obama win, but exactly what he sought from the outset. Mickey has provided a draft.

It's a start. And right now it's the best option out there. It may die in the Senate, but when you're up against Stony Lonesome, some things start to look better, and a Democrat Senator facing re-election next year might not want to explain how he screwed up and didn't vote for this. Of course President Numb Nuts might veto the bill. He IS that stupid. But he'll pay a price, as will we all.

Insty posts a link to sci-fi writer Pournelle,
who suggests actually cutting stuff even if just a little.
I can't imagine the Senate or P Obama going for it. But seems like it would make intuitive sense to many voters who have had to cut back.
LUN

What absolutely amazes me is the sheer mendacity of these cuts. There are so many out of control programs that it is a target rich environment. And yet still, the vagueness of it all just blows me away.

No one in DC seems to want to call the shots. Just tell each department to come up with 10% budget cuts, just like companies do when times are tough.

Shared sacrifice. I want the Federal government to share, and I want Congressmen to share. We can no longer afford to see exponentially increasing Federal budgets or 3600 percent increases in their net worth.

I mistakenly saw that earlier this morning when Mrs H unfortunately left, what else, NBC on. I don't think even Duke & Duke could come up with something that witlessly banal; but I don't want to put that out as a challenge.

I'm with peter. Get rid of any of the Departments created during the previous malaise presidency:
Education ($45B)
Energy ($24B)

Of course, I remember in the middle of Bubba's term a lot of Dem fundraising was done with an ad saying that the Repubs wanted to ABOLISH. THE. DEPARTMENT. OF. EDUCATION. as though it was beyond the pale. There were far fewer John Galts and Howard Beales around back then, though.

So far, however, the federal government has failed to make a dent in this destructive traffic. An early Obama administration initiative, known as Operation Fast and Furious, was widely ridiculed for giving agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives permission to allow drug cartel associates to buy weapons and smuggle them across the border in an attempt to gather evidence on Mexican kingpins. The program was shut down after it came to light.

"The polling data reveals 84 percent of Democrats back informed consent measure to give women more information about abortion’s risks and alternatives, 61 percent support parental consent before a teenage can get an abortion, and 60 percent support a 24-hour waiting period. That’s not the overall percentage of Americans who support those pro-life laws, that’s not the percentage of Republicans. That’s more than 60 percent of Democrats backing each of those policies."

and - "The results go further and they show 59 percent of Democrats back a partial-birth abortion ban, and 49 percent support a bill to allow women a chance to see an ultrasound before an abortion."

Thomas Sowell in his IBD aritcle "Boehner plan is not perfect but it ain't bad":

"Is the Boehner legislation the best legislation possible? Of course not! You don't get your heart's desire when you control only one house of Congress and face a presidential veto.

The most basic fact of life is that we can make our choices only among the alternatives actually available. It is not idealism to ignore the limits of one's power. Nor is it selling out one's principles to recognize those limits at a given time and place, and get the best deal possible under those conditions.

That still leaves the option of working toward getting a better deal later, when the odds are more in your favor."

"But I don’t have a viable strategy to enact such an improved bill, and, as best I can tell, neither do those conservatives who oppose the Boehner bill."

Hennesey not only has no strategy, he's got no more bill than the President does. Even if he did, there's absolutely no way his improved wish list could get through a divided Congress. I'd love to up the odds by handing Boehner a magic wand, myself, but there is only one viable strategy for making dreams come true here, and it's taking over the Senate in 2012.

I'm amazed that almost no one seems to be noticing the other elephant in this room. The debt ceiling deadline sets up an entirely arbitrary timeline which utterly ignores the realities of actually putting together the kind of legislation it will take to implement anything remotely resembling the substantive structural reforms we 're all looking for. If you don't understand that, then read the Obamacare Bill or the "Recovery" Act people! They will give you a mere taste of how many "ands" and "ors" and amended amendments and bureaucratic mazes will have to be negotiated and addressed -- just to get back to a baseline for change.

Moving legislative mountains is a long haul proposition. It takes serious skilz which most of our Tea Party freshmen simply haven't had the time to acquire, if not comprehend. Unlike his predecessors, Speaker Boehner has made them real partners in this process, and they'll ultimately be better representatives and legislators because of it, when 2012 rolls around. Right now, however, it's KISS time.

I think the Republicans should argue that "shared sacrifice" ought to mean that the Federal Government needs to make the same kinds of tough budget cuts that municipalities and families have been making over the last several years. The idea that Federal spending always has to go up (even the "cuts" are cuts of projected increased spending) needs to be held up to the harsh light of day. Cast the argument as the Feds taking money from municipalities--that's what Reagan did--and maybe people will understand better what is actually going on.

Rush is about to have a heart attack - he ways the stupid Repubs think they have bounced the ball back into Reid's court. But, he will simply strip out what he doesn't like in their bill and stuff it with his and bounce it back to the House.

I like Rush, but he is bereft of original thought. He read that idea this weekend like we all did. Reid still has to get the bill past a filibuster and he doesnt have the the votes/. Therefore the only bills passed are ccb and the Boehner bill. The ball would still be in Reid and Obama's court.

I am seeing (Politico and others) claims that Perry has sent out feelers to FNC to be included in their early August debate (with the supposition made that he won't officially announce until late August).

mikey, in fairness to Rush, I don't know if he claimed it as his original thought - he was reacting to TV comments of Rich Lowry, et al. (he has TV on during his show) saying how the Repubs had bounced the ball to Reid, how brilliant, blah, blah, blah. That is when Rush went ballistic.

Let Reid mess with the House bill. Maybe he can strip out the cuts and add some tax increases to it, too.

The uglier this gets, the more Dems will lose their seats in 2012.

People haven't turned on Republicans in any of the polls. In fact, the most recent polls show Republicans with a 10 point advantage on "The Economy," which I think is some sort of record. Also, Rasmussen's strong disapproval of Obama is spiking, while strong approval is flat.

Obama is playing with fire right now, apparently out of desperation. He thinks he may be able to pull a Clinton over a gov't shutdown. Only problem is, Boehner isn't Newt, who was MUCH easier to demonize, and he can always just pass a clean, short-term debt limit increase and shake his head sadly, lamenting the fact that the president insisted on tax increases and wouldn't agree to any real spending cuts, so the only thing we can do is wait for the 2012 election before taking further actions to right the ship of state.

That's what I'd like to see, anyway. Then His Petulance can try to go on TV to explain all the cuts that were in his non-existent "plan," and Boehner can shoot some fish in a barrel.

...he can always just pass a clean, short-term debt limit increase and shake his head sadly, lamenting the fact that the president insisted on tax increases and wouldn't agree to any real spending cuts, so the only thing we can do is wait for the 2012 election before taking further actions to right the ship of state.

They’re trying to scare the Republicans away with a letter saying it [the Boehner plan] is dead on arrival. Well, it’s not going to be dead on arrival. What Reid will have to do is to add a curlicue or two, some kind of amendment, something on it [the Boehner plan] so he can at least say it’s an amalgam, it’s a compromise between the Reid plan and the Boehner plan, which would allow the Democrats… who are going to be up for reelection next year [an out].

The president, who has issued what I think is a phony veto threat — I’m sure that if it reaches him there’s no way he’ll be able to actually do that.

So that will be the protection. The president will say, ‘Well, there was a compromise, it wasn’t the Boehner plan, therefore I can sign it.’

I read that this bill would allow,at the 6 person committees discretion, the ability to raise taxes

My understanding is that they will make proposals, but the congress will still have to vote on them. I don't think the constitution allows a joint house-Senate committee to enact any legislation, and certainly not a revenue-raising one.

Reid can't "strip out what he doesn't like." The Senate has to approve something. Then it goes to a conference committee to work out the differences. If they can.

I can't speak for c-cal but I think that's what she meant - strip, amend, and pass something Reid/Dems can get through the Senate. Theoretically it then goes back to conference, though they got around that with Obamacare.

However, if Reid wanted to take that route, he could have done it with CCB.

--Exactly JR; Rush is an entertainer who is very good at what he does as far as reaching the masses with a positive message. Anything beyond that is a reach.--

He's usually fun but makes some pretty bad mistakes at times.
Listened to him a little while eating lunch out in the woods yesterday. His explanation of the term "entitlement" as used re SS and medicare was a bit embarrassing and quite wrong.

From FNC reporting on an early procedure vote that took place a little while ago:

However, the Senate is expected to act on the Boehner bill should it pass. Democratic aides told Fox News that Boehner's bill is actually the best vehicle for getting a debt-cap bill to the president's desk provided changes are made to it on the Senate side -- Reid could prime the bill for those changes Thursday night.

See LUN for Pelosi on stopping the GOP to save life on the planet as we know it today. The former Speaker is accurate in her description of the stakes, at least as it relates to the Western World, which continues to slip into the Therapy State Is All model of governance. The former Speaker can't abide the notion that the ghastly slide could be reversed. I have to say that Speaker Pelosi is more candid in setting forth the stakes than Obama, Reid or the other progs who are trying to make believe that the slide towards the Euro Social State is the centrist position.

How desperately do Senate Dems want to avoid a debt ceiling vote? We've heard the veto threat, and read the Senate's warning letter. Boehner must be starting to look like a regular Nancy Pelosi when it comes to whipping the vote, because Harry Reid has announced that he won't even bring the Speaker's bill to the floor, if it does pass the House. When the automatic motion to concur with or reject the House bill kicks in, he'll just table it with a majority vote. Reid's spokesman says, "Boehner's bill dies tonight. Forever." The folks over in TPM's comment thread think this Hail Mary pass is certifiably brilliant!

It looks like the Dems aren't much happier with the idea of putting Harry Reid's "bill" to a vote. They must know it is going to get ripped to shreds if he is actually forced to lay it out in black & white and publicly put it to the test. The idea that he could stuff it into the shell of Boehner's bill was just another red herring. The days of Dems rewriting legislation to their own satisfaction ex post facto came to an end when they lost control of the House Conference. I wouldn't be surprised if the action now has come down to banging on Mitch McConnell's door.

If Boehner's bill gets through the house, Democrats will own the hot seat. I think they know they're going to have to vote on something if that happens, so they are dusting off every sabre they can rattle.

What the Dems from top to bottom want is to not revisit the issue in six months. There is little or no substantive difference between Boehner's bill and Reid's bill except for the scoring shenanigans which Reid added in order to get past the election. Ehlmendorf put a stick in the spokes by shifting the baseline and now Reid's proposal as it stands isn't enough to reach the elections.

I count four GOP efforts to reach an agreement, CCB and the current House bill plus McDonnell's plan and the bipartisan G6 nonsense. Passage today puts the ball in Reid's court and Reid's tabling of this effort will leave it there.

Maybe it's time for the President to try and lead from his behind again?

In other words ,dems are up s--- creek without a paddle. They can add an amendment if they want but it still has to pass the House again. Meanwhile Obama is totally irrelevant to the process until he hogs the spotlight and complains about having to sign a bill with no revenue to play with in it.He's been leading from his behind from the getgo and his forage into Libya put it on display for all to see.

Hey Marlboro Marine: You are just a few steps off the Fallujah 2004 battlefield, a bloody battle of the Iraq War, and you didn't stop to think what kind of message you are sending to kids? Don't you know that cigarette smoking is bad for your health? A sensitive man would have been drinking water (at least it doesn't say milk).

If Boehner can get the votes tonight, it seems to me he's been the shrewdest player involved in this thing. Reid's only excuse for tabling it will be "because I said I would." he will have been handed a choice between a bill that's similar to his own, and default.

Many of the freshmen have legislative experience at the state level — so this likely isn’t their first involvement with compromise.
Just over 70 percent of the class of 87 came to Washington with a background in politics — as state legislators, mayors, town councilmen, top political aides and sometimes even as former members of the House. Few doubt their conservatism, but their political experience is frequently underestimated.

Ok, question about this "past the 2012 elections" benchmark... Isn't this about actual tax revenues and actual federal spending? So if they raise the debt limit, and then in the next months revenues continue down and/because they continue spending like drunken sailors, what happens if they bump up against the new debt ceiling early? Like, say, Aug/Sep 2012?

Senior aides are holding conference calls to take questions from leaders of black and Hispanic organizations, local elected officials, and other political allies nationwide. Obama spoke by phone this week to a group of college student body presidents to seek their help in lobbying for a compromise. And top economic advisers have huddled in the West Wing in recent days with pastors and advocates for seniors, children and the poor — including one session with Easter Seals and families it serves to discuss the importance of Medicaid to disabled children.